My feeling is a lot of the lead function is not needed in contra. The caller and choreography eliminate the need for a leader who decides what and when things will happen and then the role of follower also becomes meaningless.
We still have the component where one dancer will provide a firm 'lead' for the other as they start a specific figure. This certainly adds to the enjoyment of the dance. Often it is the gent doing this (courtesy turn, or ladies chain). It can be the lady (into a gents allemand left) or both (as in a balance) - or even between same gender dancers. I think it is a misuse of the terms to try to apply lead and follow roles to contra dancing Mac McKeever ________________________________ From: Louise Siddons <[email protected]> To: Caller's discussion list <[email protected]> Sent: Wednesday, January 2, 2013 3:30 PM Subject: Re: [Callers] Alternate Role Terms > (b) I don't like giving up control to someone else. (In Maia's terms, I like > being 'in control' and 'taking care of' the other dancers.) I simply don't > like ceding all agency, in general, and I have never relied on the gent role > to tell me where I am going when contradancing. I can imagine it could be > sweet to feel that someone else is taking care of you, but what if they're > taking you down the wrong path? Or what if they're forcibly making you do > something you just don't want to do? Or what if they have no clue? No > thanks. Perhaps part of the problem is that this is what people are hearing when they hear "lead/follow." But a good lead-follow experience *is* a team sport, *is* about give-and-take, communication, offers from both sides, and all the rest of it. Don't let terrible dancing define dancing! Louise. _______________________________________________ Callers mailing list [email protected] http://www.sharedweight.net/mailman/listinfo/callers
